Elmee e



(No Model.)

' E. E. WARNER.

i SHOE LAGE'FASTBNBR, No. 375,402.. Patented Dec. Z7, 1887.

UNITED STATES PATENT OFFICE.

ELMER E. VARNER, OF BROOKLYN, NEW YORK.

SHOE-LACE FASTENER.

SPECIFICATION forming pari; of Letters Patent N10. 375,402, dated December 20, 1887.

Appicaton filed Oct ,ber 29, 1887. Serial No. 253,681.

.To all whom, it may concern.-

Be it known that I, ELMER E. WARNER, a citizen of the United States, residing at Brooklyn, Kings county, New York, have invented certain new and useful Improvements in Shoe- Lace Fasteners, fully described and represented in the following specification and the accompanying drawings, forming a part of the same.

The object of this invention is to furnish, in a fastener for shoe-laces and analogous purposes, a construction which may be cheaply manufactured, easily and securely attached to the shoe, convenient for use, effective in holding the laces, and neat and harmonious with the eyelets or shoe-hooks commonly used in connection with laces.

The device may be used for securing the end of a cord or lace in any construction7 as in shoes, corsets, and analogous objects. It is shown herein applied to the top of a shoe at the point where the ends of the laces require fastening.

The device consists in an eyelet, preferably of elongated form, provided with a tongue attached to one of its sides and extending across the central aperture, the tongue forming with the mouth of the eyelet a wedge-shaped aperture, into which the lace is drawn and securely held by friction.

In the drawings, Figure l represents ashoe in perspective with four of the fasteners applied thereto and shown at a a2.- Fig. 2 is a plan of the eyelet without the tongue. Fig. 3 is an edge View of the same, and Fig. 4 an end view of the same. Fig. 5 is an edge view of the tongue, and Fig. 6 a plan of the same. Fig. 7 is a side View of the eyelet when combined with the tongue. Fig.- 8 is an end view of the eyelet and the clamp for the tongue. Fig. 9 is a transverse section ofthe eyelet and tongue with part of a lace inserted therein. Fig. 10 is a longitudinal section of the combined eyelet and tongue, and Fig. 11 is a side View of an alternative construction having the tongue integral with the eyelet.

In all the views, except Fig. l, the dimensions are exaggerated to make the construction clearer. f

a is the tongue, provided with shank a.

b is the eyelet, with flanges b around its (No model.)

outer side, as is usual, to bear upon the fabric, (shown at g in Fig. 9,) and provided at one edge with a lug, c, having upon its edges ears c', bent toward one another to form a socket, d, to receive the shank of the tongue. The tongue is secured to the eyelet by placing the shank a into such socket and jamming the ears c upon it, as shown in Fig. 7, the tongue being shaped so as to then project across the mouth of the eyelet, with its outer free end slightly separated from the flange of the eyelet to permit the introduction of the lace e.

As shown in the preceding figures, the eyelet is intended to be made of malleable metal, as is usual, so as to be flanged upon its under side at f when fastened inthe fabric g,- but the tongue is made of harder or spring metal, and is preferably depressed in the center toward the mouth of the eyelet, as shown by the hollow h in Figs. 9 and 10, partly to increase its stiffness and durability and partly to crowd the lace down into the cavity@ within the eyelet, so as to produce a stronger frictional grasp upon the lace.

The eyelet and tongue may be formed in one piece of metal, if preferred, and the tongue hardened by pressure in the process of manufacture and stiffened by the corrugation h, as described above. Such a construction is shown in Fig. 11, in which the tongue is shown integral with the lug c and bent over the mouth 0f the eyelet in the required manner. Such a design requires for its construction a blank very different from that used in the manufacture of the eyelet shown in Figs. 2, 3, and 4, and the tongue would not be so elastic and durable as when made of different material and secured upon the eyelet; but the simplicity of the construction might render it preferable in a heavy fastener for holding a large cord.

The proper location of the fasteners upon a shoe is shown in Fig. 1, two being applied at the opposite sides of the shoe-opening in place of the topniost pair of shoe-hooks, and the other two being fixed upon the opposite sides of the shoe-top, near the back, with the points of the tongues turned downward or backward,

so that the laces may be readily caught beneath the same and held therein by tucking their loose ends in the top of the shoe. The

IOO

front pair of fasteners adjacent to the opening are arranged and used substantially like the ordinary lacing-hook, the lace being caught under the projecting end of the tongue by the same motion that is required with the ordinary shoe-hook, and as the lace is drawn tight itis forced toward the inner end of the tongue,and consequently down into the eyelet-aperture, as shown at l in Fig. 9, thus sharply curving the lace and wedging it between the tongue and the flanges b. After the laces have been secured in the fasteners a the ends are crossed in the ordinary manner, but instead of being knotted are drawn backward and secured under the tongues of the rear fasteners, at, and then tucked into the top of the shoe.

I am aware that a fastener for shoe-laces has been made by forming a double bend or hook in a piece of sheet metal, as shown in United States Patent No. 72,955, dated December 31, 1867, and that a fastener constituting a sort of spring-elamp has been formed by bending a strip of sheet metal and by corrugating the saine, as shown in United States Patent No. 256,999, dated April 25, 1882. I do not there fore claim a lacing-fastener when thus constructed.

My invention differs from all previous eonstructions in utilizing an eyelet as its foundation, and by making the fastener amcre modification of or attachment to the eyelet I adapt the fastener for application to the shoe or other fabric by the ordinary eyeleting-tools. The fastener may thus be applied at the same time as the ordinary eyelet shoe-hooks, and the attachment of the fasteners to the shoes is thus made a part of the ordinary construction, in stead of requiring extra labor and fixtures. The eyelet is the best known form of attachment, and by using itas the seat against which the lace is pressed by the tongue it operates as a part of the fastener, and thus performs a new function.

The aperture between the tongue and the flange of the eyelet is of wedge form, and is thus adapted to grip a lace of any size within certain limits. Such a wedge-shaped opening is not new in itself; but the elasticity of the tongue operates effectively to press the lace into the aperture of the eyelet when crowded into the wedge-shaped opening, and thus by its elastic grip wholly prevents the loosening of the lace.

My device also differs from others in pressing the lace down between two points, as is shown in Fig. 9, where the lace is shown crowded into the aperture of the eyelet between the two flanges b at its opposite edges. rIhe opposite edges of the tongue thus operate in conjunction with the opposite flanges of the eyelet to grip thelace separately, and thus hold it in the most effective manner. The depression ofthe middle also throws up the lateral edges of the tongue, and thus prevents the ehafing of the lace when drawn beneath the same. l

The eyelet is `preferably made of oblong form, as shown in Figs. 2, 4, and 10, so that its lateral flanges b', against which the lace is pressed by the edges of the tongue, may be more nearly parallel than in a round eyelet.

By applying my fastener to the opposite sides of the shoeopening at the top such fasteners are adapted to co-operate with the ordinary shoe-hooks by simply taking the place of the upper pair, while the extra pairof fasteners, which are applied to the top of the shoe farther back at opposite sides, enables me to cross the laces after applying them to the fasteners a a, and to thus prevent the laces from pulling out of the same.

It is obvious that a rigid tongue applied to the edge of the central aperture of the eyelet would operate in substantially the saine manner as the sp ringeyelet al read y described, and I do not, therefore, limit myself to the application to the ey elet of a spring-tongue or one of any other special construction.

Having thus set forth my invention, what I claim herein isl. A fastener for cords or laces, consisting in an eyelet having a tongue secured at one edge and projected across its central aperture, as and for the purpose set forth.

2. A fastener for cords or laces, consisting in an eyelet having a spring-tongue attached at one edge and projected across the mouth of the eyelet and bent partly downward into such aperturc,as by the depression l, substantially as herein set forth.

3. A fastener for cords or laces, consisting in an eyelet having at one side a lug provided with ears and a spring-tongue having a shank clasped upon the lug by such ears, the tongue projecting across the mouth of the eyelet, as and for the purpose set forth.

4. The combination, with a shoe provided with lacing-hooks, of a pair of fasteners constructed substantially as described herein and applied at the opposite sides of the top of the shoe-opening in the same relation to the opening as the hooks, and an additional pair of such fasteners applied to the top of the shoe at opposite sides and near to the back, substan tially as herein set forth.

In testimony whereof I have hereunto set my hand in the presence of two subscribing witnesses.

IELMER E. WARNER.

\Vitnesses:

L. LEE, HENRY J. MILLER.

ICO 

